قالب وردپرس درنا توس
Home / Technology / Stop panicking about Apple's rumored change from Intel to its own chips in the Mac

Stop panicking about Apple's rumored change from Intel to its own chips in the Mac

Much has been said about the possible switch from Apple to the A processor in the Mac from 2020 – but this is not the first time that Apple has persuaded a generation to change its hardware architecture.

A couple of reports from Bloomberg 's Mark Gurman have discussed in the last six months the possibility of an at least permeable membrane between iOS and macOS on the software side. Recent reports suggest that by 2020, at least some of the Macs will switch to the ARM-based A-Series processor.

While these are being shouted by mainstream media and journals alike from the highest peaks, these are by no means shattering revelations. The writings on the wall suggesting a switch to Apple's ARM-based A-Series processor have existed for at least three years

This migration is referred to as something unique, and that makes no sense. Apple has convinced its supporters to switch to new hardware architectures twice in the Mac itself. But it's actually many hurdles to the potential marketing nightmare of big shifts for users ̵

1; and at least one AppleInsider employee was there for everyone.

Apple II to Mac

Apple's first major product For consumers was the Apple II series. Without delving too deeply into the history of the basic device, the line included six major publications totaling about six million, created since the introduction of Apple II in 1977 and its final shutdown in 1993.

But in 1983, Apple saw the future. It was the Lisa and in 1984 the first Macintosh. The Mac and Apple II series continued in parallel for a while, but in the late '80s it was clear where Apple's focus was.

In 1991, Apple released the Apple IIe card for the Macintosh LC series as an interim solution to help the school migrate. It was produced until mid-1995 after the Power Macintosh was released.

Apple did not have much to do in the way of damage control in public relations, given the relatively small computer users at the time. It was mainly done by Fiat – but the IIe card for the Macintosh LC was Apple's nod toward the necessary migration tools.

The Usenet and dial-up bulletins of the day were relatively ablaze with complaints about the shift, and Apple's abandonment of them. The "Apple II Forever" movement, which was originally launched by Apple, picked up some steam, and a few die-hard fans are still fans of the hardware and are at least updating the Apple IIgs operating system and ProDOS until today.

68k to PPC

Mac users saw many changes in just a decade, starting with the 68000-based Mac 128. The Mac II with color was shipped with a monitor in 1987 for about $ 5500, with the "evil fast "IIfx shipping in 1990 for nearly $ 10,000, giving users 40Mhz of speed in a 68030-processor. The Quadra line with the 68040 covered the line in 1991 and ended in a large layer.

Just a decade after the first true Macintosh, Apple announced the Power Macintosh 6100, 7100, and 8100 and a new hardware architecture. The new machines started with System 7.1.2 and emulated 68K processor code, and as a result, a fraction of the native speed speed was possible on the Quadras of the day.

As expected, this caused some AOL-communicated drama. The emerging Internet helped with this transition as it became easier to download software patches.

Software distribution was handled by both older hardware emulation and a "fat binary" in which 68K and PowerPC code existed in the same executable file. This had an impact on storage capacity in megabytes, and a pocket industry emerged for apps that would remove the unneeded binary file from the app.

The last operating system version for the Macs of the 68K series was MacOS 8.1. Technically, the Classic environment in Mac OS X supported 68K code support, but other system software considerations and other hardware considerations, such as larger displays, prevented old software from working properly.

OS 9 to OS X

Just a few years after switching to Power PC, a lot of advertising spun around Copland, who never saw daylight, and Apple's acquisition of NeXT. Even at that time, users mocked the stability of OS 9. Steve Jobs came back and killed a large number of Apple products.

The first preview of the Mac OS X developer started in May 1998. The development of the iMac went further the iMac DV – which was really the first iMac, which was suitable for Mac OS X.

A public beta of Mac OS X was released in September 2000, with the first full release, code-named Cheetah, in March 2001. Mac OS X 10.1 Puma joined less than a year later.

Steve Jobs brought OS 9 into a coffin in 2002. It was not until June 2006 that Mac OS X 10.5 released the release of Mac OS X 10.6 Snow Leopard in June 2008, but the software has evolved a bit.

Apple took a big step forward in 2003 to facilitate future transitions. In essence, Xcode was used as the only true developer platform. Apple apparently had a plan as it was later required for the development of software for iOS, which was at a very early stage of development at that time.

PowerPC to Intel

Rumors began in 2002 that Apple had a version of Mac OS X running on Intel's processors. These rumors continued until June 2005, when Jobs at WWDC announced that only 11 years after the last major hardware shift, new Macs would use Intel processors.

PowerPC-only code ran on Apple's emulation layer called Rosetta for a while. Again, applications shipped with binaries that included code for both Intel and PowerPC, but this time they were called for a short time at the beginning of the "Fat binaries" layer, before settling for the rest of "Universal Binaries." decided the transition.

The first nail in the PowerPC coffin was the release of Snow Leopard. The finale was the annihilation of Rosetta in MacOS Lion, released on July 20, 2011.

Convincing Mac buyers to buy the iPhone and iPad

Again, after about a year of rumors, Jobs launched the iPhone Platform that would launch the company into the stratosphere. But first it had to convince the longtime Apple follower, who was supported by the iPod, to buy the device.

Originally based on the OS X kernel, no software ran on the tiny device that ran on the Mac and still launched the gold rush of the iOS App Store. Early reviews called software incompatibility as a weakness, as did some AppleInsider readers – but the phone was solid enough that it did not matter.

Somewhat later, as the rumors of the iPad began to fly about, a general refrain was that it was a Mac OS X-based device that ran Mac software and cost about $ 1,000. Nothing came of it with iOS-based tablet retailing for $ 499.

Microsoft has tried the same approach with Windows RT on the surface, but it has not prevailed at all.

The Future

The Mac was in various forms for four years in the work before it came on the market. The PowerPC Shift efforts began in 1988 with the "Jaguar" project under then-CEO Jean-Louis Gassee. It eventually merged with other efforts and evolved over the next six years to the final product.

Apple had Mac OS X builds for years before switching to Intel. It also set the table for iOS with Xcode – this is now the primary means of development for the Mac, iOS, TVOS and Watch OS.

In each layer, including less profound ones like Serial to USB and USB-A and Thunderbolt 2 to Thunderbolt 3, Apple has provided backward compatibility when needed. There's no technology left to die on the side of the road when something new arrives.

The first two times when the Mac switched to a new architecture, third-party developers got about six months before it started – and there were many more viable development environments than we have now. With a simple software update for Xcode, Apple could make its software cumbersome for the most part.

There was also a lot of drama about the lack of BootCamp. For some, probably even for most Mac users, it does not matter.

For the rest there are two improving factors. The shift will not occur immediately and will likely begin on the low end of Apple, such as the MacBook and possibly a Mac mini migration. In addition, Microsoft now has Windows on ARM with a 32-bit software compatibility layer, so virtualization or even Windows is not out of the question on any of these new machines.

More complaints are about Apple's software. While it's true that Apple might provide some quality assurance help, users who think the latest version of Apple software was the best ever have a brief memory.

In every operating system that Apple has ever delivered, there are bugs that stop the program. We only have more users beating Apple's offer than ever before, so problems will be found sooner, much like the theoretically infinite monkeys who work on typewriters, one of which gives enough time to Shakespeare's works.

What we would get With a new Apple Build ARM processor, a new processor architecture is not stuck with literally three decades of legacy routines. We got a new architecture with an architecture that can handle LPDD4 RAM, allowing up to 64 gigabytes of RAM and four times more bandwidth than LPDDR3 and conventional DDR4.

Yes, we would lose some bigots we always have at every shift. But what the leftovers would get is a superior architecture for the future that does not depend on Intel's continued tuck, with no sign of a checkmark that would help Mac users get there on time.

We have done this as a user before. When the dust settles, there will be Intel devotees, if it's talked about like the end of the day, as well as switching to Mac and switching to PowerPC. Also, your old hardware will not burn spontaneously when the shift is announced, and you can most likely wait until your favorite software is ARM native to buy new gear.

So do not be afraid of the shift. There is no need to panic.


Source link